[lbo-talk]
boddi satva
It's not that the electrons follow a curved path instead of a straight one,
^^^^ CB: Strictly speaking it is uncertain. We don't know whether it doesn't follow a curved path or whether it does. We just don't know. It's uncertain from where we stand now.
But I wasn't saying that QM says the electron follows a curved path anyway. It was more general, in that the straightline/curve language of Epicurus might be a sort of crude way of saying it is uncertain where the atom ( not electron; another difference) ends up.
Democritus' "atom" lacked most of what the modern atoms are like. In fact, the concept of sub-atomic particles like electrons undermines Democritus' concept which was elementary indivisible particles ("parts"). The elementary parts of the whole.
^^^^^^
it's that they follow a path which is unknowable except probabilistically.
Again, quantum mechanics predict (and we observe in the world) that a particle can take a path which violates geometry, not which adheres to a curved or alternate geometry. There's no geometric explaination for a particle going through an impenetrable barrier, or going faster than the speed of light or taking more than one path simultaneously, except that there is a probability it will happen, so it does.
boddi